Episode 139 - Marks on the Markets: Are We Witness a Great Tech Reset?
Subscribe to the Podcast:
Most tech headlines in recent months involve stories of layoffs and massive shifts. So what’s going on?
In this episode of Marks on the Markets, Jake Thomsen, and Ben Hames join host John Coleman to discuss the changes they see in the industry and what investors should consider as they start the new year.
The trio also debates about Elon Musk, the Metaverse, and whether or not Web 3.0 will live up to its hype. Someone even gets called a communist.
It’s a jam-packed episode to kick off the new year. Make sure you follow the show on your favorite streaming service so you never miss another episode.
All opinions expressed on this podcast, including the team and guests, are solely their opinions. Host and guests may maintain positions in the companies and securities discussed. This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as specific investment advice for any individual or organization.
Episode Transcript
Transcription is done by an AI software. While technology is an incredible tool to automate this process, there will be misspellings and typos that might accompany it. Please keep that in mind as you work through it.
John Coleman: Welcome to the Faith Driven Investor podcast. This is your host, John Coleman, and we are bringing you our monthly marks on the markets. This is where we feature great Christian investors across the spectrum offering perspectives on current market environments. We are actually recording this right now just before the holidays, so there will be a longer delay than normal. We usually release this just a few days after recording, but we'll be releasing this after the New Year. So happy New Year to everyone. We're recording this just on the eve of Christmas right now. And we are hopeful that many of the themes that we talk about will be just as relevant a couple of weeks from now as they are now. I'd like to welcome today our two guests, Jake Thomsen, who leads venture capital investing for Sovereign's Capital, and Ben Hames, who's the CEO of Eight Ventures, Private Wealth in Atlanta.
Jake Thomsen: Excited to be here. A lot going on in the marketplace and in tech. So I'm honored to be with you both.
Ben Hames: Well, it's wonderful to be here, John. Love the work you guys are doing through sovereigns. And I look forward to a good conversation today.
John Coleman: Well, today we have a very interesting topic in mind. We want to talk about the great tech reset and whether there is, in fact, some sort of reset going on within technology. Obviously, over the course of the last year, growth in technology stocks in particular will have declined. We've seen a slowdown in growth, equity and venture capital markets on the private side. And then there have been very high profile examples of disruptions within tech companies like Meta, like Twitter, which we'll dig into a little bit more deeply coming up and across the board. So the first question I have for you all and I'll start with Ben, maybe for the public markets perspective and just hear from Jake how that's playing out in private markets. But is the current decline in technology stocks likely to go further?
Ben Hames: Yeah, great question. You know, I think we all understand the enhanced risk of what was effectively free money. It's been a very cheap time to hold long term assets over the last two years. And with that, there's a loss of discipline. And so if you look back, you know, a year or two years ago, you see some very lousy valuations, particularly tied to non-profitable tech. As you know, as I've been going through year end meetings and planning meetings for 2023 with clients, you know, we talked about what we did well, what we could have done better. You know, certainly look in the mirror as a manager and trying to look at those things and very much of a Warren Buffett annual letter style to look at pros and cons, what we did well, what could have done better. You know, one of the things that you really needed to do in 2022 is the rates reset and begin to normalize is to have avoided the big pitfalls. One of those was non-profitable tech, which has just been crushed. You know, our Cathie Wood followers out there have felt the [....] of it. You know, Ark innovation, ticker symbol ARKK down 80% alphabetized. And that's really what it is. It's a collection of interesting ideas, futuristic companies, disruptors, you know. But when you cut down to what the EPS, I think their 2022 number is, you know, almost $6 a share loss. Right. And this is trading at 160 plus. You know, now we've lost 80%, but still worth 30 something dollars a share and we're losing $6 a share. Right. You know, you did the math on that. It's just so dramatically different when you start to imply a real cost of capital. So, you know, again, you know, as I talk to folks, sometimes clients who are interested in those kind of investments, you know, over the last few years, it's really been a, gosh, how do we even think about the value of these things? Right. This could be a great idea. This company could in fact, be a disruptor in the market. But we're just out in space in terms of these valuations. You have a lot of companies who don't even sniff a profit in the near term and they're trying to tens of billions in valuation. So yeah, yeah. I think the big thing in 22 is I think about it is just really being exposed. If you were, you know, pretty heavily invested in non-profitable tech. So, you know, I'll say one other thing and in wrap, yeah, as we think about, for example, the tech crash around 2000 and look at where we are today. I mean, you really do. You are anchored today by big, stable mega tech companies, companies that we live by. And really, those valuations are pretty interesting. Now, you know, I always go back to Warren Buffett like a good Christian, go into C.S. Lewis in investing, you know, we look into everything he has said in his annual letters and parsed those and learned from them. But, you know, if you like, if you like the stock, you know, this company at 40, you should love it at 30 and you should be banging in the desk to buy it at 20. And so, you know, I look at Google, I look at even Meta, which is, you know, interesting and risky. This stuff is beginning to look interesting. Make Tesla, you know, we're now at 22 times next year's earnings, I think. So again, those that love that much higher prices should really be interested now.
John Coleman: Yeah, you are right. That's one of the things I see that's different than the dot com bubble, which we can talk about a little bit. You know, we saw precipitous declines, but at that time, so much of it was really speculative technology, right? There wasn't this floor of companies with genuine business models like Tesla is a good company. Amazon's a good company. You know, Meta is a good company in its own right. At least you could argue it is improfitable, right. Some of these are profitable. And it does feel like a lot of the air has already been let out, although it certainly could face further declines Jake. How is that playing out in private markets right now?
Jake Thomsen: Yeah, so the private markets really follow public so much in the out of from what you guys are saying. I think that the SPAC segment about those tech companies is probably the closest to the dot.com. And I think we've seen a lot of that air let out, as you mentioned, John. And I think you've been you're talking about Google and others. It feels to me that there's an upward pressure on a lot of these companies that are inherently still very high quality. They're cutting a lot of costs. Right. Google is expected next year probably to cut 10,000 people that an average salary of $300,000. That's $3 billion. That's going to go to the bottom line almost overnight. And so you think about that upward pressure or below that long term valuation multiples and yet interest rates are still climbing. Right. I think what we saw in the dot com bubble was as soon as everything popped, started getting a little bit higher quality in the fundamentals and then interest rates started going back down to call it six and a half percent, 1%. That's where we really saw things starting to come back. So that's what we're watching for on the public side, because it does inform everything in the private markets in the later stages in private markets, ten, you'll call it series B, C, D plus really mimics those public markets. What we're seeing really interestingly on the earliest stages of seed especially is there's still so much dry powder out there, so much that's sitting in funds, still $200 billion or so that there are many fewer deals being done on the seed side. And yet the valuations are staying pretty steady. So it'll be interesting to see from my vantage point are racing to come back and public markets recover before all that seed capital is deployed and those valuations start to normalize a little bit, too. But that's the big unknown right now that we're watching. But certainly seeing a lot of those valuations that have come down seem to be pretty steady below the long term averages. And that makes for a pretty compelling market to be investing in.
John Coleman: You know, you touch on one topic that I'm interested in, Jake, and I'd put this to either of you. I remember the very first time I visited Northern California to look at tech companies back in graduate school. I visited one of these companies we've named, which shall remain nameless, and it was just overwhelming the amenities when you walked in the door, right. There were, you know, recycled rainforest wood floors, and you were never more than a hundred feet from a full kitchen. And, you know, all this sorts of stuff that tech has become just notorious for profligate spending, incredible benefits, great if you're working there. But the culture was one where money flow freely and there were a ton of fringe benefits. Now we're really seeing the first round of layoffs with this new era of tech, even at the big and profitable companies like Meta. Is that going to change culture? You know, do you think these layoffs are going to be consistent throughout the industry? Do you think cost saving now becomes something that tech companies look to to generate profitability? To your point Ben and what does that do to the culture of Silicon Valley and the culture of technology?
Ben Hames: Yeah, I mean, I think it's really part of this reset where you do have a real cost of capital now and you have a new focus on the bottom line and earnings per share. You know, not to suggest that 2021 for Meta is, you know, should be the baseline of what we would consider normalized earnings. But, you know, at the moment, it varies in a moment, day to day. But, you know, we're trading at about eight times 2021 earnings for Meta. We start thinking about companies that get in the mode of manufacturing earnings, what you can do with the levers of expenses and hiring and whatnot. I mean, this is about many measures, a very cheap company if they want to continue to do what they've done. And it does a little bit more about Meta, though, in which I think it's such an interesting investment case right now. Yeah, they have that problem of this is, you know, a industrialist who's been very successful at everything they've done and now they want your money to go and, you know, have a number of venues drive it. So they're kind of transforming themselves as they transform into the the metaverse dominant player into something different. Right. So there's a lot of concern that goes with that. And expenses have been through the roof in that transition. So again, that that's part of the thing that makes this is such a difficult case to analyze in terms of future investment. But again, I think you're seeing those companies, you know, Google, Meta begin to cut costs, to focus on that. And I think that bodes well for tech investors.
Jake Thomsen: Yeah, I jump on that and say it seems like a lot of these companies are going to follow the playbook that you see Microsoft and others playing where you get to a certain level of maturity and you can start to wring out some of the costs. And Wall Street really respond to that. And this is a time in the cycle where some of these companies are looking for that impact for shareholders. So I do think we're headed that way. Even the dynamics, the fundamentals are back ten, 15 years ago when you had 10% of graduates in Silicon Valley were computer science majors. Right. These days, it's more like 50 to 60%. You're starting to see that supply, which sure, there's a bit of a long tail to get in the system. But once they're in there, there's just a lot less competition for them. So I think you're going to see more of these maybe almost in a ratchet effect where bringing it down is part of the cycle. I don't know if they're necessarily you're going to come back, but I do think it'll impact culture because a lot of folks didn't sign up to be at these kinds of almost feels like PE style bring out the costs. Right. To figure out how to increase the bottom line. A lot of these tech folks, they signed on a very different company. So be interested to see how that change in culture impacts retention. A lot of developers of top tech companies.
John Coleman: Well, and I want to zero in on the people side of this, Jake, because you and I have talked about it before. I'm just consistently struck when I look at technology companies, particularly bigger ones, how few people within the companies are actually engineers. So, you know, there are a number of different positions. I can't for the life of me understand a lot of titles within the companies and just understand what people do. And I think this idea that tech might be radically overstaffed, so not by ten, 20% overstaffed, but potentially 50, 60, 75% overstaffed, really came to a head with the Twitter acquisition by Elon Musk. Right. I mean, in the first three weeks, he took that organization from 7500 people to 2700 people right in the course of three weeks. So we're not arguing necessarily that that was done well or that that's the right way to do things. But I know a lot of folks in Silicon Valley have been watching to say like, oh, my gosh, are we really operating at more than twice the number of people we need to do well and have we so overstaffed on non engineering or non-technical people that we're actually diluting the impact that those folks can have? What do you think about that? Because I actually believe it could be true in a lot of tech companies that they could be twice overstaffed what they need to be to be effective. But maybe, Jake, starting with you and then to you, Ben. And what do you see? Do you think that might be the right case or do you think that that's swung too far, that what happened at Twitter was ineffective, there couldn't be as effective in other places?
Jake Thomsen: That message resonates for me, for public companies and later stage companies and analysts acknowledge, too. Of course, we're talking about big numbers of job losses in the rest, and it's really easy to talk about them as numbers. Right. So just wanted knowledge and honor that these are individuals and families and that's hard. So I'll start with that. But what we've seen is a lot of these tech companies, you grow to a certain size if you're a public tech company. And there's a sense where complacency is forgiven, right? Where there's not the same scrappiness. Right. Elon got it. This was like, hey, we're going to work long hours and we might even work on weekends, right? Which had a lot of people up in arms because getting back to the roots of really hard work and this is completely anecdotal and unfair because I know it's incredible individuals at all of these companies, but I think about the developers at top tech companies, public companies that I know they're probably putting in 30, 35 hours a week. Right. That in some cases includes video game time, right. At these really, really fun jobs. And the developers I know and all the startups will be back are putting in at least double. Right. This is a totally different culture. So I think there is some element of that culture in that what some might call bloat that you simply can get rid of and a company is going to be okay. But there's also very rational side of that that I'd say where tech companies tend to be these lean startup mentalities, right? Build, measure, learn. You don't always know what the market wants to go build something, see how reacts. Where do we reinvest then? And when capital is cheap or free, it makes a lot of sense to overstaffed, to go seed something, to see where it goes. But once capital starts to increase in its cost, then I'll set the ROI of those kinds of endeavors, whether they're moonshots or everyday efficiencies that starts to go down. So I think there's a very rational case to be made where when capital's cheap, you kind of want to air.... The bloat in tech and then now there's coming back down from more expensive. You're going to see a lot of those that they just no longer make sense. Status positions.
Ben Hames: Yeah you guys are great in sight Jake you have a lot more experience on the ground with those companies and operators. But I will say, you know, I reflect on what had been some bizarre business news stories of the last couple of years related to this, you know, one being the collusion among tech companies to not poach from one another, which is such an, you know, an odd time, you know, but then also the later variety of that story has been the hoarding talent, you know, that you would have these counter-accusations between these big hard entities where they're, you know, you don't need these people. You're hiring all these extra folks and taking them from the market and harming the market in general. You know, again, a very strange time. You know, I will say a lot of the broader discussion in the economy right now and certainly with markets where we have a severe recession going into 2023. You know, I think a big part of that is hiring. We're talking a little bit about layoffs in the tech space, and we're just focused on tech in general today. But more broadly speaking, you know, hiring is still happening at a pretty robust clip. I think in 2019, the average monthly new hires was 164,000. Latest numbers from November. 264,000. So the hiring is still rapid in the face of this bad hype campaign. So, you know, again, we're getting some headlines and some of the tech layoffs and these big companies and again, some new fiscal discipline that I think most tech investors will welcome. But as of right now, I think there's 4 million more job openings that are unemployed Americans. And this is a big part of the recession discussion, the inflation discussion, but still persistent inflationary pressure on the wage fraud. As you look beyond tech and across the economy, significant tightness in the labor market.
John Coleman: Well, and that's why it is so interesting right now. Right. Because typically when you raise rates like this, it does cause a recession. There's a chance we're in a recession now. There's a chance that we'll see that deep end next year. But thus far, it really hasn't played out in employment. Right. The labor markets are still relatively tight. Consumer spending seems to be relatively strong right now. There are certain segments that are very interest rate dependent that have obviously got hit very hard. You know, new home building or mortgages, etc., are in a difficult spot right now because of rates. But there hasn't been the kind of real economy hit that I think you would expect after such dramatic rate tightening yet. And the question is, of course, whether that does hit. I don't want to spend too much time on this necessarily, but it's hard to talk about technology right now without talking about the private company, Twitter, and obviously the activities of Elon Musk as of this recording. Musk has done a survey on Twitter about whether he should be CEO and has decided to step down. There are a whole host of implications because Musk is really at the top of a number of the most innovative companies in the world. Right. SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, and now Twitter are all in very different areas. And he seems to have his hands on a lot of those spaces. Right now, Tesla stock is cratering as a result partially of people believing that he's distracted. Twitter obviously took on a lot of debt, maybe just starting out of the gates. I mean, Jake, what's your impression of what's going on out there? And is Elon still, you know, a genius? He's going to be able to turn all this stuff around or has he finally met his match in what he's taken on here? What's your read on what everyone's talking about right now in Silicon Valley?
Jake Thomsen: Yeah, the only thing I can say with confidence is I've considered canceling my Netflix subscription and just read Elon's tweets over the last few weeks because they are oh, my gosh, they are golden at times. And it is it's you know, you would not expect a public company CEO to be engaging in some of those ways, but it's anybody's guess. You know, some folks will say, why is he wasting all this time here where he has all these world changing companies that he should be leading and really focusing on? And I think there's a case to be made that Twitter is our de facto public square. It's worth the focus of somebody really, really smart. And I do think that he's working really hard to extricate himself from Twitter. He's trying to hand over some folks that, at least from what some people are saying, weren't that interested in taking it on Twitter. He doesn't have the heir apparent at this point. But I would say, you know, it turns out empirically there are really only three categories or three times where a public company CEO deeply drives an outcome in terms of value creation. The first one is when they are the ones that are setting culture. Right. And there's more research on this happening in the faith driven sphere, especially. The second one is when there's a major transition. The third one is when the company is a very innovative company and the CEO is driving that innovation, all of Steve Jobs. And so it's such a good question. Longway we're just getting my affirmation of your question because he's such a smart, gifted guy who probably does drive to [....] that a lot of these companies are delivering, especially the earlier ones like the Neuralink's and others that are potential categories in the future that need him in the earlier days more than maybe Tesla does or others that have a bevy of engineers and leaders. But it's certainly a notable time watching a leader like Elon.
John Coleman: Yeah. What do you think, Ben? I mean, you're watching this, you have talked about Tesla before
Ben Hames: I'll try not to get too lost in the weeds of that momentary headline, such Elon is really good creating. You know, I hope in the rearview mirror a year, ten years from now, Elon Musk will be a champion for free speech. And I think he is positioned to do that. Maybe he does that more effectively as the owner and not the guy who's, you know, fighting with tweets. It's hard to do, right? It's hard to do well over an extended period of time. You know, if I am a significant Tesla investor, I probably would love the idea of him not continuing to operate as he has in these first few days and weeks. So, yeah, remains to be seen.
John Coleman: Well, you know, he's got good teams there. I think everybody knows that. SpaceX, Tesla and Neuralink are now, or at least SpaceX and Tesla seem really deep. I'm less knowledgeable about Neuralink, like you said, Jake. Part of me thinks, gosh, you're getting to Mars, creating full autonomy, creating human computer interfaces like why?
Jake Thomsen: And doing the blue chips. One of these things does not belong. Yeah, exactly.
John Coleman: But you're right. I mean, this is look, if you think about the culture, this idea of a public space, of speech, of what's acceptable, of how we should communicate with each other is a cultural touchstone right now. And and certainly his instincts have been very strong historically about what was needed in the moment. And those companies seem to be creating durable values. And you look at SpaceX. Not only are they going to Mars, but they have the broadest satellite network in the world now. I mean, they're delivering Internet to Ukraine right now and to hurricane stricken areas. It's just fascinating to see what that will look like in the future. Moving to another pretty notable entrepreneur right now, Mark Zuckerberg. You know, Mark made this massive bet in transitioning Facebook to meta, moving away from social network to creating the metaverse. And I think he's bet billions of dollars or tens of billions of dollars on creating the metaverse. And so far, Meta has really gotten punished in the public markets partially as a result of the downturn, but partially because a lot of the hoped for success in the metaverse, at least within the context of that company, has not materialized. Jake, I know you've invested in the space. Is the metaverse dead or are we going to see some sort of resurrection here? And is Zuckerberg on the right track, or do you think there's actually needed a pivot right now on how we think about it?
Jake Thomsen: I don't think Metaverse is dead. I would probably, as a meta observation, so to speak, I'd say this is a reasonable bet from his perspective, because you see, the long arc of innovation is that some of these these hardware's over the last 30 plus years have gone from desktop to laptop to mobile. And a lot would say that augmented reality, virtual reality may be the next on that path. Right. And they're increasingly ubiquitous, they're increasingly immersive, they're increasingly part of our lives. And so it's not crazy to think, especially when glasses come out right, where you're almost RoboCop style. You bring the glasses, you can see through them. But maybe the three of us can be sitting in a room engaging with each other. Right. For instance. And people oftentimes think of virtual reality, just little clunkier, fewer use cases. But as Oculus comes out with its pro headset, which is already announced as Apple comes out with the headset next year, I think we're going to see continued interest in this. I don't know if it's truly going to be the integral part of our lives that Zuckerberg hopes, but I think it's a reasonable bet because what he's doing is he's standing against the innovator's dilemma, right? Where you get to be such a big company and something is working and that thing that is working, all the stakeholders have an incentive to just keep focusing on that and then eventually somebody leapfrogs you because you're not thinking ahead. But he's investing downstream of consumer behavior, and that's a really important thing that startups can do. But oftentimes public companies can't necessarily. But because of the voting structure, which is frustrated, some folks is able to. So I think the metaverse holds a lot of promise. It probably doesn't look a lot like what most folks think it would. And from Meta's perspective, I think it's a reasonable bet, at least in the medium term.
John Coleman: What do you think, Ben? What's your metaverse avatar right now?
Ben Hames: Yeah, that's what I wanted to get into. I was hoping we would go there. Yeah, I have mixed comments here. You know, first and foremost, you know, more of us living more in an alternate universe and taking advantage of kind of products that will be offered in the metaverse strikes me as a dystopian situation. But from an investment perspective, you know, there has been this trend, as Jake outlines of, you know, further and further entrenchment into our lives and more time spent aiming and interacting virtually. I mean, my goodness, just think of Zoom and and its competitors and how that's reshaped work life. Yeah, it's going to be interesting to see. You know, again, I think if I could just talk a little bit about the investment case for Meta. You know, there's part of me that has to keep in mind the ability that they would have to just retrench and go back to the tried and true model that they have and pull those levers. And all of a sudden you have something that's really valuable, not that risky, and trading at a pretty cheap price. And so, you know, again, I sort of view it as a this may be a disaster for Meta in terms of the foray into the metaverse and the big expenses, but it may in the NBA blip and they go back to the old Facebook and advertising and making a whole lot of money.
John Coleman: Yeah. And you know, the other Elon twist here that's interesting from my perspective is, you know, it's been a taboo topic forever to have social media companies charge their users. Right. It's been an advertising model. The user has been the product, they sell data, etc.. And Elon has kind of opened Pandora's box, so to speak, on trying to charge people for the blue checks, which Jake noted $8 or $11 if you're on the Apple store. And one thing I'm interested in watching is if that does get some traction, which seems moderate so far, whether that impacts the core business models of some of the other social companies and whether they try and adopt that much the way that media companies have, you know, media companies, for a long time, it was thought that online information was going to be free. And now paywalls have gone up around the number of media companies and even substack, which is something in between social media and a media company obviously charges for newsletters or has authors charge for newsletters. So I'm fascinated to see where that ends up as well and what the charge model will look like moving forward. To speak of a more precipitous and obvious decline before moving into something really interesting and hopeful that's happened as of this recording very recent news, Sam Bankman-Fried is on his way back to the United States, where he faces potential jail time or I think he may have already been transferred to the pen in New York. News today was that his two counterparts, Caroline Ellison and one of his co-founders, have turned on him and so have pled guilty to their charges and are theoretically cooperating with authorities and FTX obviously just suffered a precipitous collapse. Kind of same question with the metaverse, with the collapse of FTX, with the collapse of so many coins around this web 3.0 was supposed to be the next big thing between bored apes and cryptocurrencies in these exchanges is that dead is web 3.0. Do we need to find a web 4.0 now? What's next Jake?
Jake Thomsen: Yeah, I say it's not dead but is indeed hung over. So it feels dead, but it's going to pull itself out of bed.
John Coleman: It's mostly dead, as they say in The Princess Bride or.
Jake Thomsen: Yeah, that's true. They are doing this, but it's getting nursed itself back to health. And I delineate two different parts of this, right? One is the core web. Three, the blockchain technology part aside from crypto. And to me that feels like such a logical progression to say it is inevitable. Is it based on word? But did you use a taxonomy like web one was? We read the internet, right web two is we read and write right blogs and Facebook and the rest. Web three is really about reading, writing and owning. We own our information, we own our content, we own our contributions. We benefit from contributions to social networks. Right. And that that is something consumers are going to want. It's going to be consumer demand. So those companies that are building on a web3 blockchain technology are going to be the ones that do very well in the future. So I don't think it's as a category. It's dead. What I do think is we're not going to talk about it quite as much in the same way we don't talk about Internet companies, we don't talk about AI companies, we talk about tech companies because those things have become such an integral part of those technology stacks. They're just part of companies. Now, I think we're going to see the most innovative tech companies built on web3 infrastructure. They won't be a Web three company, they'll just be a tech company. So I think that'll stick around. It'll be maybe a little more muted longer term in terms of crypto, which is the juicy part of the sector. I'll tell you that the analogy that resonates for me is it is a force that was in need of a fire for its own long term health. It's really hard in the meantime, but you got to you got to have that pruning of the ecosystem so it can really grow. And as we talked about before, they're just thousands of thousand points that probably shouldn't exist. I think a lot of those go away. Even the really good coins that weren't the main ones, but some of that, old coins in that were really good business cases. I think they had a problem of governance, right, where you would have some of these founders that made their money before they really created values, they cashed out and weren't aligned long term because they were in the tokens rather than the equity. What I do think is FTX this whole debacle is going to put a focus on governance. Then investors will say, All right, I like this project, but we're going to make sure we align these interests. And that's going to enable these incredible founders with good technologies, good products to actually come out of the rubble. I think there will be a handful of some the best web3 crypto companies that will come out this time. But it's not a space that I would necessarily recommend anybody go and start pouring lots of money into right at this point.
John Coleman: When I like your description, Web 3.0 is about what we own and part of the FTX debacle, right, was people thought they owned something that was actually being traded and owned by Alameda Research. Right. Which was FTX was practically personal family office. And that was all of this is allegedly, of course. But, you know, that was a real betrayal of the underlying infrastructure of that and people becoming nervous about what they actually own.
Jake Thomsen: Well, I'll add to that that the Web3 enthusiasts would say, well, the big problem is that was a centralized exchange. So the problem, web3, is that could have been defi decentralized finance, where you didn't have somebody like SBF that's calling all the shots and you would be unable to do that because the math would be unable to do that. Right. An algorithm can go buy a penthouse in the Bahamas, right? Only a person can. And so a lot of folks would say if that were truly set up on web3 infrastructure to then trade web3 assets, then you wouldn't have had the FTX debacle.
Ben Hames: You know, it's interesting you bring that up because I hear a lot of versions of that with regard to crypto and what's happened in the last year, which, you know, again, maybe there's some merit there, but it strikes me as very similar to the arguments we always hear about communism. It's never been practiced. Is it true to its form? Is there have been done well and if it were, it would create a utopia. But you know, you think about all the things that and I'm you know, I'm out there and have been for a long time. I'm not a fan of crypto, you know, all the things that it was supposed to solve, you know, it really has failed with flying colors quickly. Yeah. Yeah. You see, you know, there's an effort to differentiate, right? Is it Bitcoin is the thing. You know, I'm in that crowd. I can't get past. I don't know why it's worth anything. Right? I mean, was it overvalued at 60,000? It now is worth 16. You know, again, we kind of go back to some of those valuation discussions we had earlier thinking about valuing companies by that op ratio or you know, we haven't talked about some of the alternative valuation methods, but, you know, the rule of 40 or some of the things that people would use in the tech space, you know, where we have some tools where we can try to assess and apply value. You know, to me, the fact that blockchain technology is a valuable technology and will continue to be more valuable in the future, it just implies no particular value to crypto, right? I mean, it's a non sequitur that bitcoin is worth $500, much less 17,000 because blockchain technology is valuable. Yeah, that's the case I would make is though, you know, I just can't get comfortable with this at any price.
John Coleman: Well, and Jake, since Ben did just call you a communist, I think you get to respond.
Ben Hames: Well.
Jake Thomsen: And is a good thoughts, comrade. But I mean, you know, those are all great thoughts and and the right kind of question that we need to be hold in the industry, too, over time. I suspect I see all the innovation come out of bull markets there, and I do think there's more value it created over time. It's got to have an actual problem being solved, whereas much of it doesn't yet. So a little bit to be determined and it's a fair, [....]. Absolutely.
John Coleman: So I want to kind of close we're going to close formally on asking what you guys are learning through scripture right now that you want to share with others. But as we pivot, you know, we're thinking about a great tech reset, right? There's been a collapse in these markets. They're undergoing layoffs like the dot com bubble. What came out of that was much different than what went in. Right. We came out with a more stable base of real companies that were growing after that. As you guys look at what's happening today and we reset valuations in technology and also potentially where people are focused, what are you most excited about in technology right now? So maybe, Ben, start with you, but are there areas of technology that you're excited about investing right now?
Ben Hames: Yeah, it's I think it's really hard to pick the winners in this space. And so partially, I've sort of hedged the bad in this space by making some broader plays. But I really like cyber. I think that's a part of the spin that is going to grow. You know, I think, you know, we've recently seen in business news there's a large zeal for all going on and the banks are are working together to determine how to refund those defrauded and that sort of thing. But again, it's hitting us on all fronts. That's the space that I want to be in and want to be exposed to have been and continue to think that's an important place for folks to have exposure.
John Coleman: Jake, what do you think? Where are you guys focused as you look at early stage tech companies right now?
Jake Thomsen: Yeah, I'll offer a bit more. General answer and more stage focus. And that's really in the series A. As I mentioned, that's not an area that I'd start to see the valuations coming down. A lot of companies that raise, call it 12 to 18 months of capital in the last year. So they're coming up maybe mid 2023 to raise capital. Do you find a company that is capital efficient actually solving a big problem with a greedy creative leader? There are a lot of companies that unfortunately are holding period of time I think PE is going to take out a lot of the other ones that are at really good valuations. So I think the playing field is going to be winnowed a bit and these are going to be types of companies that longer term are going to be successful. And I think the valuations make that even more than seed and more than later stage. Really compelling, particularly because seed and series A they tend to be the highest performing in terms of internal rate of return for a very early stage. So that's what we're really looking at over the next six, nine months in particular.
John Coleman: That's great. And I would just add two thoughts from my end. One thing that's really caught my attention lately is artificial intelligence with chat GPT coming out and proving some of the power of that technology and that we actually have crossed the threshold at which that technology has consumer applications and is good. Right. You use chat GPT. And for its current use case, it's actually a remarkable piece of programing, a remarkable piece of technology that's likely to unlock a number of other things, both good and bad. But AI is on my radar, and I still think we're going to see a lot of innovation in health care right now, particularly remote delivery of health care, telehealth, virtual health care. You know, that was a hot item during the pandemic because people couldn't get physically to their health care. But it just seems like a lot of the stickiness of that model is starting to manifest in the market. And I just I think there's a lot of innovation to continue to happen in this space of more bespoke health care delivery, particularly things like telehealth, which is one thing I think will make people's lives better, but also could present some interesting investments. You know, we always like to close this because it's the Faith Driven Investor podcast, and I know you two are both great men of faith with you offering just your thoughts on what God's teaching you through Scripture right now that you might want to share with others. And so if you don't mind, Jake, we might start with you and then Ben, you can close us out.
Jake Thomsen: I'd be happy to set the bar very low. So we're going through a study. This is actually at work with our investment team, going through a study now. And what we highlight recently, Joy and I was just very struck reading of scripture about joy of how elusive, sometimes true deep joy can be. And there's a quick framework of this that joy involves. Step one just recognize the way that Christ is in the day to day, right, of all the various blessing that we have. Number two, trust him in those moments where it's not necessarily easy to see how things work out. And number three, thank him. Right. Almost a discipline of Thanksgiving and how if we can do those things consistently, it cultivates joy in our hearts. And this has been a big blessing to dive that top and joy in the season. Even with everything go on the markets where it's easy for our heads to be steady and the rest, and yet our hearts do still go up and down with market.
John Coleman: It's a good word, Jake. Pastor Ben, what do you think?
Ben Hames: Well, that I'll it'll be tough to follow that. You know, I will reflect on something that Erin and I had recently. I of course, Erin's my wife. We were recently reflecting on. We have for 20 plus years now practice the Sabbath. I guess it's been about 20 years to study. While we were in seminary, we determined that we should continue to honor and practice the Sabbath in a way that is sort of countercultural, even within Christian circles. And yet we were, as we reflected on 20 years of doing that. You know, I can recall that early along at certain points, you know, I guess on occasions feel somewhat restricted, the things that we said that we wouldn't do on Sunday, you know, as we look back through the seasons of our life now 20 years of marriage and now I have a ten year old and a six year old. This has was such a gift, right, to have this sacred day that will you know, we won't lead our ox into the ditch. We'll do the work. We do all the things we need to do to have that day set aside and to disallow ourselves or to imagine that God intends for us not to work and have others work in our stead on that day. You know, in a busy world, in a stressful two or three years here with COVID in these things, that has been such an incredible gift for us and just, I think, imparted such peace, such time for worship, for family time when we just said this is what we can do. I mean, I'm reminded of an old Hebrew parable where, you know, there is a gentleman who is walking in his field on a Saturday and he sees a fence that needs repair. And he has this idea that he won't even be able to repair it because he saw it on the Sabbath. Right. But, you know, just that that kind of idea that we've tried to live out and then no doubt very roughly and poorly by some measures, certainly of some of our Jewish friends that do so well. But I would just commend, you know, some type of Sabbath to all my friends and those I would care about. It's something that's just been very life given. For us as a family.
John Coleman: Amen and Amen. Well, Jake Thompson, Ben Hames, we are really grateful for you spending time with us today on the Faith Driven Investor podcast. I know I feel like I'm leaving with a better perspective on technology in the marketplace and certainly the wisdom that you shared on your own faith journeys has been important. So thank you all for joining us today and we hope to see you again soon.
Jake Thomsen: Thank you, John. Thanks, Ben. Good to be with both.